Whose "lane" is it?"

[kaytieeldr]

I don't understand why you would have to get a child out of a car seat on the traffic side of the vehicle. That sounds dangerous. I used to get out of the car, walk around to the sidewalk, and get dd out on that side of the vehicle. If traffic was really bad, I'd slide over to the passenger seat and exit the vehicle on the sidewalk side of the street, as well.

understood that this is all just hypothetical - but it would at the very least be extremely difficult to slide over to the passenger side with bucket seats. And if you have two kids in car seats, getting the one behind the driver out from the passenger side would at least be awkward.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Vehicles traveling on the road have right of way. Vehicles entering the road must yield until safe entry onto the road can be made.

You had to wait longer.

It sounds like she was waiting, had been waiting in the same spot/position at the end of a three-point turn for several minutes until the road cleared completely.

 

[John VN]

It sounds like she was waiting, had been waiting in the same spot/position at the end of a three-point turn for several minutes until the road cleared completely.

Can't wait with vehicle in traffic flow. Doing so technically puts the vehicle waiting in the flow of traffic and thus, as has been mentioned, impeding smooth traffic flow.

 

[golfgal]

The police came but didn't make a report. I asked them to but they said it was up to our insurance to figure out what happened and left.

The police don't determine fault but they SHOULD have written up a report-especially if your car had to be towed away. They record the facts of what happened-show where the cars were positioned, take statements from people on the scene, etc. If they responded there is a good chance they did write up a report, but maybe not.

ALWAYS insist on a police report for ANY accident, no matter HOW SMALL. It prevents people from changing their story, which happens ALL the time.

 

[Carly_Roach]

I'll have to agree with everyone else and say you were impeding the flow of traffic, even if only by 1/2 a foot. If you want to spend time trying to fight this then I wish you well and hope you enjoy your new hobby.

 

[Carly_Roach]

The police don't determine fault but they SHOULD have written up a report-especially if your car had to be towed away. They record the facts of what happened-show where the cars were positioned, take statements from people on the scene, etc. If they responded there is a good chance they did write up a report, but maybe not.

ALWAYS insist on a police report for ANY accident, no matter HOW SMALL. It prevents people from changing their story, which happens ALL the time.

Umm...yeeeeaaah.

I don't know about your state or city or the location of the OP, but here in Lansing they're talking about cutting 68 law enforcement positions. One of the time-wasting things that will also have to be cut from the jobs will be the writing up of reports for minor traffic accidents where no one was hurt. In fact, most of us will be counting ourselves lucky if we can get an officer to show up at all for these kinds of fender-benders.

I think people had better get used to the fact that this kind of service (reports for traffic accidents) is going to go bye-bye due to lack of funding.

 

[LilyWDW]

It sounds like she was waiting, had been waiting in the same spot/position at the end of a three-point turn for several minutes until the road cleared completely.

Yes, the OP was waiting, but was doing so after already entering the lane of traffic. They needed to be OUT of the lane of traffic, no matter how small of the vehicle was poking out. By even having that small amount into the lane of traffic, they are considered to be impeding the flow of traffic.

The person traveling in the lane of traffic has right of way and has the right to have full use of that lane.

 

[java]

Sorry I agree that the person traveling in the lane of traffic has the right of way. It stinks that he hit you- but really it's not his fault. You were sticking out into the lane of traffic. - not moving. Just as if your car breaks down and someone hits you from behind I believe you would be the one getting the ticket for not moving out of the lane of traffic. At least that's what happened in NY.

 

[golfgal]

Umm...yeeeeaaah.

I don't know about your state or city or the location of the OP, but here in Lansing they're talking about cutting 68 law enforcement positions. One of the time-wasting things that will also have to be cut from the jobs will be the writing up of reports for minor traffic accidents where no one was hurt. In fact, most of us will be counting ourselves lucky if we can get an officer to show up at all for these kinds of fender-benders.

I think people had better get used to the fact that this kind of service (reports for traffic accidents) is going to go bye-bye due to lack of funding.

Um, yeah, I really don't care if they are cutting positions, if there is an accident a police report is the only thing you have to protect yourself in an accident and the resulting claim. People change their stories ALL the time, especially once they figure out their insurance rates are going to go up. Maybe people in your town should vote in budget increases and raise taxes to cover these kinds of things .

 

[NMAmy]

Um, yeah, I really don't care if they are cutting positions, if there is an accident a police report is the only thing you have to protect yourself in an accident and the resulting claim. People change their stories ALL the time, especially once they figure out their insurance rates are going to go up. Maybe people in your town should vote in budget increases and raise taxes to cover these kinds of things .

Well, sadly, we can't all live in Minnesota.

 

[Carly_Roach]

And I'd rather the police be actually handling crime and public safety issues instead of making out paperwork for insurance purposes.

 

[tvguy]

I thought the guy was on a bike not in a car. The phrase "settle with the guy for $20,000 and pay to fix his car" is confusing me a bit. The neighbor's car?

They paid off the guy on the bike...and they paid to fix my neighbor's car.

 

[tvguy]

Ok, there is paying for claims and there is assigning fault. Assigning fault is what raises your rates. If your neighbor was not assigned fault, big deal. Insurance companies DO settle cases often because, especially in this case, it's less expensive to pay the $20K then it is to go to court-and that is a good thing because it keeps rates down for everyone. It doesn't mean that your neighbor will see any change in his insurance rates. Now, you also have to realize that there are two sides to every story and are you positive that your neighbor is telling you the total truth??

Well, I did see the police report and the police did conclude based on all witness statements that the bike rider hit the car that had been stationary for over 30 seconds at a red light. Not like the car had just stopped and there was a collision.
I have no idea what angle the bike riders attorney was taking, but whatever it was, the insurance company felt it was cheaper to just pay them $20,000 to go away.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

Wouldn't your vehicle have to be parallel to the traffic lane for this to happen?

No, I was about 20 or 30 degrees off the lane of traffic. He hit my mirror, and then my wheel. It wouldn't have been possible to get perfectly parrallel (e.g. within the parking lane) because the driveway's about 1 car length wide.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Yes, the OP was waiting, but was doing so after already entering the lane of traffic. They needed to be OUT of the lane of traffic, no matter how small of the vehicle was poking out. By even having that small amount into the lane of traffic, they are considered to be impeding the flow of traffic.

The person traveling in the lane of traffic has right of way and has the right to have full use of that lane.

Understood - but it seemed like the person I was answering thought the OP was actively moving into the traveling lane.

 

[Bob NC]

You asked for opinions and you've argued with every single one that doesn't agree with you.

Why did you even bother posting?

 

[crashbb]

You asked for opinions and you've argued with every single one that doesn't agree with you.

Why did you even bother posting?

Practice for arguing with the insurance people?

 

[Sarah_Rose]

I was involved in a similar accident a couple years ago (stationary but slightly sticking out into traffic in order to see past parked cars next to a driveway). The guy who hit me WAS speeding in this case and my car was totalled because he hit my corner and my car pivoted and hit one of the parked cars in the parking lane.

The police did come to that accident and I was issued a citation for unsafely entering the traveling lane (don't remember the exact wording) even though I was stationary when the other guy hit me. The insurance companies obviously found me at fault, as well. The police officer who issued the citation told me that he had to cite me because I had been in the traveling lane when the collision occurred, but showed me exactly what pictures to take to illustrate the situation, and explained exactly how I should explain the collision to the judge at traffic court. I did exactly what the officer explained, and the citation was dismissed because it was impossible for me to safely enter the traveling lane because of the parked cars.

Still, for insurance purposes, I was at fault, even though the attending officer was 100% sympathetic that I wasn't actually "at fault". It sucks, but it is the way it is.

 

[Christine]

I was involved in a similar accident a couple years ago (stationary but slightly sticking out into traffic in order to see past parked cars next to a driveway). The guy who hit me WAS speeding in this case and my car was totalled because he hit my corner and my car pivoted and hit one of the parked cars in the parking lane.

The police did come to that accident and I was issued a citation for unsafely entering the traveling lane (don't remember the exact wording) even though I was stationary when the other guy hit me. The insurance companies obviously found me at fault, as well. The police officer who issued the citation told me that he had to cite me because I had been in the traveling lane when the collision occurred, but showed me exactly what pictures to take to illustrate the situation, and explained exactly how I should explain the collision to the judge at traffic court. I did exactly what the officer explained, and the citation was dismissed because it was impossible for me to safely enter the traveling lane because of the parked cars.

Still, for insurance purposes, I was at fault, even though the attending officer was 100% sympathetic that I wasn't actually "at fault". It sucks, but it is the way it is.

I kind of like the way the Japanese assess blame in a traffic accident (or how they used to when I lived there). They believed that, in an accident, it was rare that there was one party completely at fault. They believed that if both drivers were doing their job and paying attention that accidents could be avoided.

Whenever an accident occurred the police who responded would listen to the story of the participants and assess blame in percentages.

In the OPs case, they might decide that she was partially wrong for being a little bit in the travel lane (but it would be a necessity for her to do so to pull out) and might assess her with 50% of the cause and they would assess the guy with 50% because even though he was traveling in his lane and had authority to use ALL of his lane, it was also his job as a driver to safely make sure his lanes were clear and to avoid any obstructions to his lane.

I kind of like that idea.

 

[golfgal]

I kind of like the way the Japanese assess blame in a traffic accident (or how they used to when I lived there). They believed that, in an accident, it was rare that there was one party completely at fault. They believed that if both drivers were doing their job and paying attention that accidents could be avoided.

Whenever an accident occurred the police who responded would listen to the story of the participants and assess blame in percentages.

In the OPs case, they might decide that she was partially wrong for being a little bit in the travel lane (but it would be a necessity for her to do so to pull out) and might assess her with 50% of the cause and they would assess the guy with 50% because even though he was traveling in his lane and had authority to use ALL of his lane, it was also his job as a driver to safely make sure his lanes were clear and to avoid any obstructions to his lane.

I kind of like that idea.

That is how it works here too. RARELY is it just one person's fault-with the exception of rear end accidents usually, but not always. The difference being that the insurance companies access the percentage of blame, not the police. It's called comparable negligence--which basically means you are responsible for watching out for every one else on the road and if you could have done something to avoid the accident and didn't (like this guy could have moved over) your are assessed part of the blame.